>
> Do you have any info about _any_ system passing this 100% successfully?
>

If you look at the log files for various systems that are found in the
original source code (http://www.netlib.org/fp) you will see that SunOS
passed 100% but SunOS with GCC did not. These results were from 1995.

> What about that the code itself might have a bug in it?

The package is not documented at all, but the few references to the ucbtest
don't find any fault with it.
However, this thread has strayed a little from the main theme. I just
happened to notice that the cabsd routines failed on my machine and
was wondering what could have caused the failure. It turns out that
the latest GCC somehow produces bad code.
The ucbtest itself should not be of much concern. The failures for
the trig functions, I assume, are because the error is greater than
1 ulp and the upper bound for these errors is usually stated to be
1 ulp (although this is not part of the IEEE standard).
But failures for ceil(), floor(), and cosh() do seem to be of some concern.
The file clib_DP.output should be examined to see what actually happened
with those functions.
There are other FP test packages available, although not many, and most
of these are without documentation and with messy source code as well.
Someone or some organization needs to write a comprehensive, well documented,
and neat test package for FP. The problem is that FP is a very abstruse area
that few people want to bother with and that even fewer possess the
qualifications for.
Frank Peters